Differences in shifts - eTorque vs. Non?

[Zinger]

I've driven the eTorque hemi a few times now, and I thought it was really smooth with its shifting. However, after doing some math and a bunch of thinking, I'm favoring going with the regular Hemi instead of the eTorque motor.

So my question to those who have driven both - is there a noticeable difference between shifting with the regular Hemi?

 

[Goatmann]

What would be different? The trannys are the same in either etourqe or non etourqe 5.7l models, are they not?

I don’t have the etourqe and the tranny shifts super smooth.

 

[alacombe]

I just hate the delay of the e-torques auto start from a stopped position.

 

[SpeedyV]

So my question to those who have driven both - is there a noticeable difference between shifting with the regular Hemi?

Reviewers that have tested both have indicated that the eTorque trucks shift more smoothly when pulling. This makes sense, both for off-the-line starts and with what we know about the system’s behavior when shifting.

 

[Yedi]

I just hate the delay of the e-torques auto start from a stopped position.

You should drive a 2019 GM with the start stop if you wanna feel a delay....it's bad.

I love my E-Torque, from what I've read it applies power during shifts to pick up any "gaps"

I don't have any delay when it shuts off at a stop light, it starts instantaneous. I've tried numerous different scenarios, and it always beats me. Very well designed

 

[Ezshooter]

My wife actually noticed the difference in shifts on our test drives of an e-Torque and the regular hemi. I was paying more attention to time it took to get up to speed. We went with an e-Torque due to its smoother ride. I sometimes have to pay attention to my starts, as its easy to scratch the tires with the extra torque if there is any debris / rock / gravel in the lane - its instantaneous in my perception when start stop is working. I have a friend that had Chevy's start stop, so I see why its reviled by a lot of people - Toyota does this better than anyone (on their hybrids), but Ram is pretty nice. YMMV but you asked, IMHO and .02.... lol.

 

[Zinger]

My wife actually noticed the difference in shifts on our test drives of an e-Torque and the regular hemi. I was paying more attention to time it took to get up to speed. We went with an e-Torque due to its smoother ride. I sometimes have to pay attention to my starts, as its easy to scratch the tires with the extra torque if there is any debris / rock / gravel in the lane - its instantaneous in my perception when start stop is working. I have a friend that had Chevy's start stop, so I see why its reviled by a lot of people - Toyota does this better than anyone (on their hybrids), but Ram is pretty nice. YMMV but you asked, IMHO and .02.... lol.

I think I'm going to have to find a regular Hemi to test drive for comparison. How much smoother, or rather, is it $1400 smoother is the main question.

Interesting you mention the starting torque. I've come to the conclusion that as much as the marketing talks about the "1/2 tire rotation" startup torque capability of eTorque, it's completely unnecessary in a truck with a Hemi and 3.92 gears. I'm running a 2003 ford 5.4 motor with 3.73s and I've never a once said to myself, "Boy, I really wish I could get moving faster," even while towing my 6000lb camper. It's on the highway where I'm always complaining!

So if we sum up eTorque:
1. Provides minuscule real world gas savings that most likely will never result in a positive ROI. This also comes at the expense of start-stop behavior, which is but a gas mileage band-aid and not the way anybody would ever want their truck to actually function.
2. Provides a bunch of start moving torque where it's not really needed and can actually be a traction liability.
3. Smoothes out shifts
4. Smoothes MDS transitions?
5. Adds tons of complexity and failure points to the truck
6. You pay $1400 for the privilege of helping Ram claim better CAFE numbers.
7. eTorque adds 75 lbs? of additional dead weight to the truck

So I'm looking at 3 and 4 as the only real positives. 5 is a major negative, as we are getting reports of bad eTorque batteries already here on the Forum.

If the Hemi by itself shifts smooth enough for me, I think I know what I'm buying.

 

[taumaz]

I can not get my foot off the brake and onto the gas faster than the truck restarts, delay is a non issue for me.

 

[Craftman]

Bottom line if you have it you love it - Don't have it its a waste of money. Same as every other option.

 

[Zeronet]

Initially my thoughts were “I gotta have ETorque!” and wouldn’t think of ordering a truck without it. Then after the price increase I was thinking “darn that makes it a tougher choice but it’s cool I still want it but it’s not a must have”. Now after a few months of watching video reviews, reading actual owners personal experiences and looking at real world mileage reports I have concluded I probably don’t want it. For me, I’m disappointed that it hasn’t lived up to my expectations of what it could have been.

Looks like for my expected build I would get about .6mpg improvement and save some brake pad wear for $1450. Then I have an additional point of failure and give up 80lbs of payload. In my case it’s not worth it.

 

[go-ram]

What would be different? The trannys are the same in either etourqe or non etourqe 5.7l models, are they not?

I don’t have the etourqe and the tranny shifts super smooth.

Take a look at the video in the first post on page one of this thread:
https://5thgenrams.com/community/threads/etorque-6-things-you-probably-didnt-know.3126/

 

[go-ram]

I think I'm going to have to find a regular Hemi to test drive for comparison. How much smoother, or rather, is it $1400 smoother is the main question.

Interesting you mention the starting torque. I've come to the conclusion that as much as the marketing talks about the "1/2 tire rotation" startup torque capability of eTorque, it's completely unnecessary in a truck with a Hemi and 3.92 gears. I'm running a 2003 ford 5.4 motor with 3.73s and I've never a once said to myself, "Boy, I really wish I could get moving faster," even while towing my 6000lb camper. It's on the highway where I'm always complaining!

So if we sum up eTorque:
1. Provides minuscule real world gas savings that most likely will never result in a positive ROI. This also comes at the expense of start-stop behavior, which is but a gas mileage band-aid and not the way anybody would ever want their truck to actually function.
2. Provides a bunch of start moving torque where it's not really needed and can actually be a traction liability.
3. Smoothes out shifts
4. Smoothes MDS transitions?
5. Adds tons of complexity and failure points to the truck
6. You pay $1400 for the privilege of helping Ram claim better CAFE numbers.
7. eTorque adds 75 lbs? of additional dead weight to the truck

So I'm looking at 3 and 4 as the only real positives. 5 is a major negative, as we are getting reports of bad eTorque batteries already here on the Forum.

If the Hemi by itself shifts smooth enough for me, I think I know what I'm buying.

Just curious, are you trying to convince yourself that eTorque is no good, or are you trying to convince us?

If you have done your research and calculations and have thought about it and determined that eTorque is not for you, that's great. But why are you continuing to try prove to the rest of the world that eTorque doesn't cut it? Why not let the people that want it or have it, enjoy their purchase? Whether or not the next person has it on their truck is completely immaterial to you, and it shouldn't even matter to you.

And, BTW, there IS value in helping FCA bring up their CAFE averages. If another owner is willing to do that, maybe you should just quietly be thankful that others are helping keep FCA viable, so that you can buy exactly the truck you want.

This is just like the Ecodiesel justification threads. If an Ecodiesel is not person A's cup of tea, fine. But person A should not try to convince person B that they would be stupid to buy an Ecodiesel. Just let it go, enjoy what you enjoy, can afford, and chose to buy, and let the next person do exactly the same.

 

[Zinger]

Just curious, are you trying to convince yourself that eTorque is no good, or are you trying to convince us?

If you have done your research and calculations and have thought about it and determined that eTorque is not for you, that's great. But why are you continuing to try prove to the rest of the world that eTorque doesn't cut it? Why not let the people that want it or have it, enjoy their purchase? Whether or not the next person has it on their truck is completely immaterial to you, and it shouldn't even matter to you.

And, BTW, there IS value in helping FCA bring up their CAFE averages. If another owner is willing to do that, maybe you should just quietly be thankful that others are helping keep FCA viable, so that you can buy exactly the truck you want.

This is just like the Ecodiesel justification threads. If an Ecodiesel is not person A's cup of tea, fine. But person A should not try to convince person B that they would be stupid to buy an Ecodiesel. Just let it go, enjoy what you enjoy, can afford, and chose to buy, and let the next person do exactly the same.

I'm actually trying to convince myself that it *IS* worth it, but I'm coming up short in doing that. I think it's a REALLY cool system, but not for the price or the complexity that it adds.

If it was the same price as the regular Hemi I'd take it, and at some point I imagine it will be the only option, but we are not there just yet.

I think it was genius to call it "eTorque," instead of "Auto-Start" or "Start-Stop," which is what it really is. It's a minor gas saver at the end of the day, and a very expensive one. Once I realized that my perspective changed quite a bit.

Not trying to ruffle any feathers, to each his own, just using a forum for what it was designed for - open and honest discussion.

 

[Gman]

I couldn't find a truck that lined up with the configuration I wanted in a non-eTorque configuration. I didn't "need" the panoramic sunroof either, but try and find a Limited without it. After having the Hemi with eTorque for a week, I really like it. I got to experience the engine braking on hill descent and really like that. It starts very smoothly and instantly. I'm impressed with how often the truck is in ECO/MDS. My first half tank of fuel had a lot of idling while trying to figure out and configure the truck, but after some driving the average MPG is coming up nicely. I won't be a bit surprised if I can beat that 22 MPG highway rating.

Having come from a Mercedes Benz with Start/Stop, the Ram implementation works so much better. I had to reflexively disable the feature on the MB.

 

[ExcursionDiesel]

I think you have enough info to make your decision. Shift quality is fine on either one. If you think you might regret Etorque, skip it. If you think Start/Stop is lame, definitely skip it.

 

[JHowellAK]

I've driven the eTorque hemi a few times now, and I thought it was really smooth with its shifting. However, after doing some math and a bunch of thinking, I'm favoring going with the regular Hemi instead of the eTorque motor.

So my question to those who have driven both - is there a noticeable difference between shifting with the regular Hemi?

I personally love my etorque. Here are the two pertinent reasons for this thread:
Start stop is years ahead of the competition. The immediate idle vs the traditional surge you would find with a regular alternator is amazing. It additionally assists with the first half turn of the tires allowing a good transition from electric to gas.
The smoothness of the shifting. Your etorque does make your engine shift smoother. During shifting, your engine is "grabbed" by the small electric motor. It slows it down to the new RPM faster and smoother while taking that energy and storing it.

 

[RAMBS]

The Hemi's eTorque motor is good for 16 horses and 49 lb-ft and, multiplied through a slightly different ratio for an assist of 130 lb-ft. Who thinks that some programmer / tuner can resist tapping into this bonus in the foreseeable future? It could help us keep up with those Chevy and Fords that are a tad bit quicker right now?

 

[SpeedyV]

The Hemi's eTorque motor is good for 16 horses and 49 lb-ft and, multiplied through a slightly different ratio for an assist of 130 lb-ft. Who thinks that some programmer / tuner can resist tapping into this bonus in the foreseeable future? It could help us keep up with those Chevy and Fords that are a tad bit quicker right now?

I'm totally thinking about this. At some point, belt slippage becomes a factor. But think of it like changing a supercharger pulley...there's bound to be some gains possible by changing the belt/pulley and beefing up the internals of the MGU/BSG.

 

[Zinger]

I'm totally thinking about this. At some point, belt slippage becomes a factor. But think of it like changing a supercharger pulley...there's bound to be some gains possible by changing the belt/pulley and beefing up the internals of the MGU/BSG.

I keep thinking Ram would have loved to add in the additional torque like this. Something stayed their hand. Could be the battery is just too small, longevity, or a host of other things.

 

[NewLove]

With new updates that are out now, the MPGs are getting much better also